in reply to win2unix

seems to me like your code snippet will damage a file where ^M are already missing: chomp will remove \n and chop next to it will eat a good character.

Secondly, it will not work on Win32, because you did not used "binmode" on that filehandle.

Additionally I just thought about not important but funny thing: you closed a filehandle because it is a good practice (perldoc says that it's not needed, because perl does this for you).
Let's go further and do even more: let's undefine all defined wariables, return to initial directory, and so on...
:)

Courage, the Cowardly Dog.

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re: Re: win2unix
by Anonymous Monk on Jul 21, 2002 at 03:16 UTC
    Closing files is probably still a good habbit to get into. Consider:
    That it documents that you won't be messing with a file anymore.
    And if you use flock(), and are into the habbit of NOT closing your files, you could end up with a messy unintentional bottleneck
    A reply falls below the community's threshold of quality. You may see it by logging in.
Re: Re: win2unix
by ackohno (Scribe) on Jul 20, 2002 at 16:33 UTC
    My experience with files that are mushed up with the ^M's has been that there is one on every line in the file, so naturaly, I didn't realize there could or might be a line without the ^M.

    Whould removeing ^Ms really be useful in windows?

    Hehe, I come from C and C++. Not closeing filehandles is of the devil >:)-|<.